The Problem with Delaying Measles Elimination.

Measles is a highly infectious disease leading to high morbidity and mortality impacting people's lives and economies across the globe. The measles vaccine saves more lives than any other vaccine in the Essential Programme of Immunization and is also the most cost-effective vaccine, with an extremely high return on investment. This makes achieving measles elimination through vaccination a key child health intervention, particularly in low-income countries, where the overwhelming majority of measles deaths continue to occur. All countries and regions of the world have committed to achieving measles elimination, yet many have faced challenges securing political commitment at national and global levels and predictable, timely, and flexible support from global donors, and experienced setbacks during the COVID-19 pandemic. This has happened against a backdrop of stagnant measles vaccination coverage and declining enthusiasm for vertical programmes, culminating in a World Health Organization Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (WHO SAGE) review of the feasibility of measles eradication in 2019. Sustaining the elimination of measles long term is extremely difficult, and some countries have lost or nearly lost their measles elimination status in the face of ongoing importation of cases from neighbouring or closely connected countries in which elimination had been delayed. Thus, a widening equity gap in measles immunisation coverage creates challenges for all countries, not just those facing the greatest burden of measles morbidity and mortality. Delaying elimination of measles in some countries makes it cumulatively harder for all countries to succeed for three principal reasons: increased inequity in measles immunisation coverage makes outbreaks more likely to happen and to be larger; political will is very difficult to sustain; and immunity may wane to a point that transmission is re-established. New strategies are needed to support countries and regions in their vision for a world without measles, including ways to galvanise domestic, regional and global resources and ignite the political will that is essential to make the vision a reality.

The impact of the COVID-19 vaccination programme on symptomatic and severe SARS-CoV-2 infection during a period of Omicron variant dominance in Ireland, December 2021 to March 2023.

BackgroundAs Ireland prepared for an autumn 2023 COVID-19 vaccination booster campaign, there was concern that vaccine fatigue would affect uptake, which has been abating.AimThis study aimed to quantify the direct impact of the COVID-19 vaccination programme in Ireland on averted COVID-19-related outcomes including symptomatic presentations to primary care/community testing centres, emergency department (ED) presentations, hospitalisations, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions and deaths, in individuals aged ≥ 50 years, during Omicron dominance.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective observational COVID-19 vaccine impact study in December 2021-March 2023 in Ireland. We used national data on notified outcomes and vaccine coverage, as well as vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates, sourced from the World Health Organization's live systematic review of VE, to estimate the count and prevented fraction of outcomes in ≥ 50-year-olds averted by the COVID-19 vaccination programme in this age group.ResultsThe COVID-19 vaccination programme averted 48,551 symptomatic COVID-19 presentations to primary care/community testing centres (36% of cases expected in the absence of vaccination), 9,517 ED presentations (53% of expected), 102,160 hospitalisations (81% of expected), 3,303 ICU admissions (89% of expected) and 15,985 deaths (87% of expected).ConclusionsWhen Omicron predominated, the COVID-19 vaccination programme averted symptomatic and severe COVID-19 cases, including deaths due to COVID-19. In line with other international vaccine impact studies, these findings emphasise the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination for population health and the healthcare system and are relevant for informing COVID-19 booster vaccination programmes, pandemic preparedness and communicating the reason for and importance of COVID-19 vaccination in Ireland and internationally.

Actualización del coste de vacunar a lo largo de toda la vida en España para el año 2023 / Updated cost of vaccinating throughout life in Spain in 2023

Fundamentos: en el calendario de vacunación a lo largo de toda la vida del consejo interterritorial del sistema nacional de Salud (cisns) se introdujeron cuatro modificaciones importantes en 2023. El objetivo de este estudio fue estimar el coste de la vacuNación a lo largo de toda la vida a una persona sana y a ciertos grupos de riesgo tomando como referencia el calendario de 2023 yCompararlo con una estimación previa de 2019. Métodos: se realizo un estudio descriptivo del coste de administrar las vacunas incluidas en el calendario de vacunación a lo Largo de toda la vida para el año 2023 y en el calendario para grupos de riesgo.Resultados: el coste estimado de vacunar a una persona sana a lo largo de toda la vida en 2023 es de 1.541,56 euros en mujeres Y 1.498,18 euros en hombres, lo que supondría un incremento del 125% con respecto al coste en 2019. Las condiciones de riesgo con El coste más alto son asplenia además de déficit del complemento e inmunodeficiencias primarias, suponiendo 3.159.82 euros y 2.566Euros, respectivamente, de media. Vacunar a toda la población sana en españa en un año costaría unos 565 millones de euros y Vacunar a la cohorte de recién nacidos de 2023 a lo largo de toda la vida unos 500 millones de euros.Conclusiones: a pesar del incremento en el coste en 2023, considerando el impacto económico de las enfermedades prevenibles por vacunación en la sociedad, la vacunación sigue siendo una intervención barata que aporta múltiples beneficios.(AU)

Background: four modifications were introduced in the lifetime vaccination schedule of the interterritorial council of the National health system (cisns) in 2023. the aim of this study was to estimate the cost of vaccinating a healthy person and people with Certain risk conditions throughout life in spain and to compare with a previous estimation from 2019.Methods: a descriptive study of the cost of administering the vaccines included in the lifetime vaccination schedule for the year 2023 and in the schedule for risk groups was carried out. Results: the estimated cost to immunize a healthy person throughout life in 2023 is 1,541.56€ for a woman and 1,498.18€ for a Men, which corresponds to an increase of 125% compared to the cost in 2019. The risk conditions with the highest cost are asplenia And complement deficiency and primary immunodeficiencies, with a cost of 3,159.82 euros and 2,566 euros respectively on average. The cost of vaccinating the whole healthy population in spain in a year is around 565m€. Moreover, the cost of vaccinating the New-borns cohort of 2023 was estimated at 500m€. Conclusions: despite the cost increase in 2023, immunization is still a very cheap intervention, considering the economic Impact of immunopreventable diseases in the society. The relative low cost of immunization throughout life makes this health inter-vention useful and worthwhile.(AU)

Adverse events after first and second doses of COVID-19 vaccination in England: a national vaccine surveillance platform self-controlled case series study.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the incidence of adverse events of interest (AEIs) after receiving their first and second doses of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccinations, and to report the safety profile differences between the different COVID-19 vaccines. DESIGN: We used a self-controlled case series design to estimate the relative incidence (RI) of AEIs reported to the Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioners national sentinel network. We compared the AEIs that occurred seven days before and after receiving the COVID-19 vaccinations to background levels between 1 October 2020 and 12 September 2021. SETTING: England, UK. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals experiencing AEIs after receiving first and second doses of COVID-19 vaccines. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: AEIs determined based on events reported in clinical trials and in primary care during post-license surveillance. RESULTS: A total of 7,952,861 individuals were vaccinated with COVID-19 vaccines within the study period. Among them, 781,200 individuals (9.82%) presented to general practice with 1,482,273 AEIs. Within the first seven days post-vaccination, 4.85% of all the AEIs were reported. There was a 3-7% decrease in the overall RI of AEIs in the seven days after receiving both doses of Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 (RI = 0.93; 95% CI: 0.91-0.94) and 0.96; 95% CI: 0.94-0.98), respectively) and Oxford-AstraZeneca ChAdOx1 (RI = 0.97; 95% CI: 0.95-0.98) for both doses), but a 20% increase after receiving the first dose of Moderna mRNA-1273 (RI = 1.20; 95% CI: 1.00-1.44)). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccines are associated with a small decrease in the incidence of medically attended AEIs. Sentinel networks could routinely report common AEI rates, which could contribute to reporting vaccine safety.

Impact of COVID-19 vaccination on COVID-19 hospital admissions in England during 2021: an observational study.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on hospital admissions in England in 2021. DESIGN: Observational study of emergency admissions for COVID-19 by vaccination status in people 16 years and over in England. SETTING: Hospitals in England. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 48.1 million people registered with an English GP, aged ≥16 years with a recent NHS contact. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Emergency hospital admissions with a primary diagnosis of COVID-19 between 1 January and 31 December 2021. Monthly admission rates were directly standardised for age, sex, risk category and vaccination dose to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) over time, between vaccine doses, age groups and risk groups. RESULTS: A total of 192,047 hospital admissions were included. The unvaccinated admission rate was higher in December 2021 (6.1 admissions per 100,000 person-days; 95% CI: 5.9 to 6.3) than January 2021 (4.9; 95% CI: 4.9 to 5.0). Vaccinated admission rates were ≤1 per 100,000 from February to December. Doses 1 and 2 VE waned over time, particularly in older and clinically vulnerable groups (although this may reflect that they were vaccinated earlier). Dose 3 VE remained above 93%. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 hospitalisations were consistently highest in the unvaccinated. Despite high case rates at the end of 2021, overall admission rates remained stable, driven by low admission rates among vaccinated people. There is population-level waning in VE, recovering after subsequent doses, potentially more marked in older and at-risk groups. The findings support JCVI (Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation) guidance for an ongoing booster programme, especially in older people and higher clinical risk groups.

[Updated cost of vaccinating throughout life in Spain in 2023]. / Actualización del coste de vacunar a lo largo de toda la vida en España para el año 2023.

OBJECTIVE: Four modifications were introduced in the Lifetime Vaccination Schedule of the Interterritorial Council of the National Health System (CISNS) in 2023.The aim of this study was to estimate the cost of vaccinating a healthy person and people with certain risk conditions throughout life in Spain and to compare with a previous estimation from 2019. METHODS: A descriptive study of the cost of administering the vaccines included in the Lifetime Vaccination Schedule for the year 2023 and in the schedule for risk groups was carried out. RESULTS: The estimated cost to immunize a healthy person throughout life in 2023 is 1,541.56€ for a woman and 1,498.18€ for a men, which corresponds to an increase of 125% compared to the cost in 2019. The risk conditions with the highest cost are asplenia and complement deficiency and primary immunodeficiencies, with a cost of 3,159.82 euros and 2,566 euros respectively on average. The cost of vaccinating the whole healthy population in Spain in a year is around 565M€. Moreover, the cost of vaccinating the new-borns cohort of 2023 was estimated at 500M€. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the cost increase in 2023, immunization is still a very cheap intervention, considering the economic impact of immunopreventable diseases in the society. The relative low cost of immunization throughout life makes this health intervention useful and worthwhile.

OBJECTIVE: En el calendario de vacunación a lo largo de toda la vida del Consejo Interterritorial del Sistema Nacional de Salud (CISNS) se introdujeron cuatro modificaciones importantes en 2023. El objetivo de este estudio fue estimar el coste de la vacunación a lo largo de toda la vida a una persona sana y a ciertos grupos de riesgo tomando como referencia el calendario de 2023 y compararlo con una estimación previa de 2019. METHODS: Se realizo un estudio descriptivo del coste de administrar las vacunas incluidas en el calendario de vacunación a lo largo de toda la vida para el año 2023 y en el calendario para grupos de riesgo. RESULTS: El coste estimado de vacunar a una persona sana a lo largo de toda la vida en 2023 es de 1.541,56 euros en mujeres y 1.498,18 euros en hombres, lo que supondría un incremento del 125% con respecto al coste en 2019. Las condiciones de riesgo con el coste más alto son asplenia además de déficit del complemento e inmunodeficiencias primarias, suponiendo 3.159.82 euros y 2.566 euros, respectivamente, de media. Vacunar a toda la población sana en España en un año costaría unos 565 millones de euros y vacunar a la cohorte de recién nacidos de 2023 a lo largo de toda la vida unos 500 millones de euros. CONCLUSIONS: A pesar del incremento en el coste en 2023, considerando el impacto económico de las enfermedades prevenibles por vacunación en la sociedad, la vacunación sigue siendo una intervención barata que aporta múltiples beneficios.

Racial discrimination, low trust in the health system and COVID-19 vaccine uptake: a longitudinal observational study of 633 UK adults from ethnic minority groups.

OBJECTIVES: To examine whether racial/ethnic discrimination predicts future COVID-19 vaccine refusal, and whether this association is explained by trust in government and the health system. DESIGN: Longitudinal observational study of racial/ethnic discrimination occurring since the start of the first lockdown (measured in July 2020) and later COVID-19 vaccine status. SETTING: UK (England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland). PARTICIPANTS: A total of 633 adults belonging to ethnic minority groups who took part in the UCL COVID-19 Social Study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: COVID-19 vaccine refusal (vs. accepted/waiting/had at least one dose) between 23 December 2020 and 14 June 2021. RESULTS: Nearly 1 in 10 (6.69%) who had refused a COVID-19 vaccine had experienced racial/ethnic discrimination in a medical setting since the start of the pandemic and had experienced twice as many incidents of racial/ethnic discrimination than those who had accepted the vaccine. Structural equation modelling results indicated a nearly four fold (odds ratio = 3.91, 95% confidence interval = 1.40 to 10.92) total effect of racial/ethnic discrimination on refusing the vaccine which was mediated by low trust in the health system to handle the pandemic (odds ratio = 2.49, 95% confidence interval = 1.12 to 5.39). Analyses adjusted for a range of demographic and COVID-19 related factors. CONCLUSIONS: Findings underscore the importance of addressing racial/ethnic discrimination and the role the National Health Service in regaining trust from ethnic minority groups to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake among ethnic minority adults.

Vaccinating adolescents against SARS-CoV-2 in England: a risk-benefit analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To offer a quantitative risk-benefit analysis of two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination among adolescents in England. SETTING: England. DESIGN: Following the risk-benefit analysis methodology carried out by the US Centers for Disease Control, we calculated historical rates of hospital admission, Intensive Care Unit admission and death for ascertained SARS-CoV-2 cases in children aged 12-17 in England. We then used these rates alongside a range of estimates for incidence of long COVID, vaccine efficacy and vaccine-induced myocarditis, to estimate hospital and Intensive Care Unit admissions, deaths and cases of long COVID over a period of 16 weeks under assumptions of high and low case incidence. PARTICIPANTS: All 12-17 year olds with a record of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in England between 1 July 2020 and 31 March 2021 using national linked electronic health records, accessed through the British Heart Foundation Data Science Centre. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Hospitalisations, Intensive Care Unit admissions, deaths and cases of long COVID averted by vaccinating all 12-17 year olds in England over a 16-week period under different estimates of future case incidence. RESULTS: At high future case incidence of 1000/100,000 population/week over 16 weeks, vaccination could avert 4430 hospital admissions and 36 deaths over 16 weeks. At the low incidence of 50/100,000/week, vaccination could avert 70 hospital admissions and two deaths over 16 weeks. The benefit of vaccination in terms of hospitalisations in adolescents outweighs risks unless case rates are sustainably very low (below 30/100,000 teenagers/week). Benefit of vaccination exists at any case rate for the outcomes of death and long COVID, since neither have been associated with vaccination to date. CONCLUSIONS: Given the current (as at 15 September 2021) high case rates (680/100,000 population/week in 10-19 year olds) in England, our findings support vaccination of adolescents against SARS-CoV2.

Genital warts trends in Australian and overseas-born people in Australia: A cross-sectional trend analysis to measure progress towards control and elimination.

Background: Substantial declines in genital warts have been observed in countries with quadrivalent/nonavalent human papillomavirus (q/n HPV) vaccination programmes, with Australia showing the most pronounced and long-term reductions. No study has assessed progress towards elimination of genital warts in a nation-wide sample of patients, and migrants' contribution to population-level control of genital warts. We assessed Australia's progress towards genital warts elimination by examining trends in diagnoses in Australian- and overseas-born patients of sexual health clinics (SHCs) across Australia. Methods: A cross-sectional trend analysis of new genital warts diagnoses among first-time patients of 34 SHCs, between 2004 and 2018, was performed. Rate ratios (RR) were calculated using Poisson regression models, for comparing trends in proportions of new genital warts diagnoses in Australian- and overseas-born patients during the pre-vaccination era (2004-2007) and the vaccination era (2008-2018), and by 2018 relative to 2004-2007. Findings: A total of 439,957 new patients (Australian-born: 230,230; overseas-born: 209,727) were seen at SHCs, 6•4% were diagnosed with genital warts (Australian-born: 7•1%; overseas-born: 5•6%). By 2018, there had been a 64% reduction in the proportion of all SHC patients with a genital warts diagnosis relative to 2004-2007 (RR: 0•36, 95% CI: 0•35-0•38). The decline was more pronounced at 72% (RR: 0•28, 95% CI: 0 •27-0•30) among Australian-born patients, with the greatest reduction in women and men aged <21 years, at 98% (RR: 0•02, 95% CI: 0•01-0•03) and 92% (RR: 0•08, 95% CI: 0•06-0•11), respectively. By 2018, there was a 49% reduction in the proportion of overseas-born patients diagnosed with genital warts (RR: 0•51, 95% CI:0•48-0•54), and a 21% reduction in overseas-born patients from countries with no or bivalent HPV (bHPV) vaccination programme (RR: 0•79, 95% CI: 0•71-0•90). Interpretation: The substantial reductions in Australian-born people is a testament to the efficacy of quadrivalent (qHPV) and nonavalent (nHPV) vaccines and the high and wide-spread vaccination coverage in Australia. However, population-wide elimination of genital warts in Australia is dependent on other countries initiating or expanding their own HPV vaccination programmes. Funding: The Australian Government Department of Health and Seqirus Australia.

[The cost of vaccination throughout life in Spain]. / El coste de vacunar a lo largo de toda la vida en España.

OBJECTIVE: The evaluation of vaccination programmes using cost estimation is an essential tool for immunization policy. The aim of this study was to describe the cost of vaccination through-out life in Spain, both in healthy and risk groups persons. METHODS: Description of cost of vaccination following the national immunization programme throughout life agreed for 2019, and the immunization programme for risk groups. RESULTS: The expected cost to immunize a healthy person is 726.06 euros for a healthy woman and 625.89 euros for a healthy man, ranging from 982.99 to 1,815 euros per person in risk groups. CONCLUSIONS: The relatively low cost and the important benefits for health of immunization throughout life make this public health measure useful and worthwhile. Evaluation of immunization programmes should be strengthened in order to assure suitable immunization in every stage of life.

OBJETIVO: La evaluación de los programas de vacunación mediante la estimación de costes es una herramienta fundamental para orientar la política de vacunación. El objetivo de este trabajo fue describir el coste que conlleva en España la vacunación a lo largo de toda la vida, tanto a personas sanas como pertenecientes a grupos de riesgo. METODOS: Se realizó un estudio de descripción de los costes para administrar las vacunas incluidas en el calendario común de vacunación acordado para el año 2019, y en el calendario para grupos de riesgo, a lo largo de toda la vida. RESULTADOS: El coste previsto de la vacunación a lo largo de toda la vida fue de 726,06 euros por cada mujer sana y 625,89 euros por cada hombre sano durante el 2019. En personas con las condiciones de riesgo que requieren mayor número de vacunas osciló entre 982,99 y 1.815 euros por persona. CONCLUSIONES: El relativo bajo coste de la vacunación a lo largo de toda la vida y los importantes beneficios para la salud que conlleva la vacunación hacen que esta medida sea útil y rentable, por lo que se debe reforzar la evaluación de los programas de vacunación para asegurar la vacunación adecuada en todos los momentos de la vida.

Will HPV vaccination prevent cervical cancer?

We conducted a critical appraisal of published Phase 2 and 3 efficacy trials in relation to the prevention of cervical cancer in women. Our analysis shows the trials themselves generated significant uncertainties undermining claims of efficacy in these data. There were 12 randomised control trials (RCTs) of Cervarix and Gardasil. The trial populations did not reflect vaccination target groups due to differences in age and restrictive trial inclusion criteria. The use of composite and distant surrogate outcomes makes it impossible to determine effects on clinically significant outcomes. It is still uncertain whether human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination prevents cervical cancer as trials were not designed to detect this outcome, which takes decades to develop. Although there is evidence that vaccination prevents cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1 (CIN1) this is not a clinically important outcome (no treatment is given). Trials used composite surrogate outcomes which included CIN1. High efficacy against CIN1+ (CIN1, 2, 3 and adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS)) does not necessarily mean high efficacy against CIN3+ (CIN3 and AIS), which occurs much less frequently. There are too few data to clearly conclude that HPV vaccine prevents CIN3+. CIN in general is likely to have been overdiagnosed in the trials because cervical cytology was conducted at intervals of 6-12 months rather than at the normal screening interval of 36 months. This means that the trials may have overestimated the efficacy of the vaccine as some of the lesions would have regressed spontaneously. Many trials diagnosed persistent infection on the basis of frequent testing at short intervals, i.e. less than six months. There is uncertainty as to whether detected infections would clear or persist and lead to cervical changes.

Pre-vaccination screening strategies for the use of the CYD-TDV dengue vaccine: A meeting report.

The first licensed dengue vaccine, CYD-TDV (Dengvaxia) is efficacious in seropositive individuals, but increases the risk for severe dengue in seronegative persons about two years after administration of the first dose. For countries considering the introduction of Dengvaxia, WHO recommends a pre-vaccination screening strategy whereby only persons with evidence of a past dengue infection would be vaccinated. Policy-makers need to consider the risk-benefit of vaccination strategies based on such screening tests, the optimal age to introduce the vaccine, communication and implementation strategies. To address these questions, the Global Dengue and Aedes-transmitted diseases Consortium (GDAC) organized a 3-day workshop in January 2019 with country representatives from Asia and Latin America. The meeting discussions highlighted many challenges in introducing Dengvaxia, in terms of screening test characteristics, costs of such tests combined with a 3-dose schedule, logistics, achieving high coverage rates, vaccine confidence and communication; more challenges than for any other vaccine introduction programme. A screening test would require a high specificity to minimize individual risk, and at the same time high sensitivity to maximize individual and population benefit. The underlying seroprevalence dependent positive predictive value is the best indicator for an acceptable safety profile of a pre-vaccination screening strategy. The working groups discussed many possible implementation strategies. Addressing the bottlenecks in school-based vaccine introduction for Dengvaxia will also benefit other vaccines such as HPV and booster doses for tetanus and pertussis. Levels of public trust are highly variable and context specific, and understanding of population perceptions and concerns is essential to tailor interventions, monitor and mitigate risks.

Did school characteristics affect the uptake of meningococcal quadrivalent vaccine in Greater Manchester, United Kingdom?

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to assess if school characteristics were associated with the uptake of the meningococcal ACWY (MenACWY) vaccine in Greater Manchester in 2017/18. STUDY DESIGN: This is an ecological cross-sectional study. METHODS: We analysed data on all 129 schools in seven local authorities in Greater Manchester from the Department for Education and from local child health information systems to determine whether school characteristics, including school type and Ofsted effectiveness score, were associated with vaccine uptake. Schools with no eligible pupils were excluded. We undertook single-variable and multivariable analysis and considered key interactions. RESULTS: The overall uptake rate was 80.7%, with a median uptake per school of 80.6% (interquartile range, 69.0%-87.4%). Lower vaccination rates were associated with lower overall effectiveness scores (odds ratio [OR]: 3.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.00-4.19) and lower numbers of pupils eligible for vaccination (OR: 1.39, 95% CI: 1.28-1.51). Schools with a lower percentage of pupils for whom English is a second language and high deprivation were associated with lower uptake (OR: 1.58, 95% CI: 1.41-1.78). In addition, community schools (the schools with the most local authority oversight) had lower vaccination rates than other categories of schools. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, uptake rates of the MenACWY vaccine were associated with all five school characteristics considered. Effectiveness scores for schools had the largest association with vaccine uptake, with poorer schools having lower uptake. These characteristics should be used by vaccination providers to prioritise their interventions to increase immunisation rates.

[False beliefs about vaccines]. / Falsas creencias sobre las vacunas.

Vaccines are an essential tool for the prevention of infectious diseases. However, false ideas and rumours with no scientific foundation about their possible negative effects may dissuade people from being vaccinated, with the consequent risks for the health of the population. The objective of this article is to evaluate the origin and the arguments of some of the most frequent mistaken ideas and rumours about the possible adverse effects of vaccines. Some clearly established adverse effects are presented, as well as false beliefs about various vaccines and potential harm to health. Vaccines, like any drug, can cause adverse effects, but the possible adverse effects of vaccination programs are clearly lower than their individual (vaccinated) and collective benefits (those vaccinated and those who cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons). The possible adverse effects attributable to vaccines should be detected by powerful and well-structured pharmacovigilance systems.

Introduction of rubella-containing-vaccine to Madagascar: implications for roll-out and local elimination.

Few countries in Africa currently include rubella-containing vaccination (RCV) in their immunization schedule. The Global Alliance for Vaccines Initiative (GAVI) recently opened a funding window that has motivated more widespread roll-out of RCV. As countries plan RCV introductions, an understanding of the existing burden, spatial patterns of vaccine coverage, and the impact of patterns of local extinction and reintroduction for rubella will be critical to developing effective programmes. As one of the first countries proposing RCV introduction in part with GAVI funding, Madagascar provides a powerful and timely case study. We analyse serological data from measles surveillance systems to characterize the epidemiology of rubella in Madagascar. Combining these results with data on measles vaccination delivery, we develop an age-structured model to simulate rubella vaccination scenarios and evaluate the dynamics of rubella and the burden of congenital rubella syndrome (CRS) across Madagascar. We additionally evaluate the drivers of spatial heterogeneity in age of infection to identify focal locations where vaccine surveillance should be strengthened and where challenges to successful vaccination introduction are expected. Our analyses indicate that characteristics of rubella in Madagascar are in line with global observations, with an average age of infection near 7 years, and an impact of frequent local extinction with reintroductions causing localized epidemics. Modelling results indicate that introduction of RCV into the routine programme alone may initially decrease rubella incidence but then result in cumulative increases in the burden of CRS in some regions (and transient increases in this burden in many regions). Deployment of RCV with regular supplementary campaigns will mitigate these outcomes. Results suggest that introduction of RCV offers a potential for elimination of rubella in Madagascar, but also emphasize both that targeted vaccination is likely to be a lynchpin of this success, and the public health vigilance that this introduction will require.

How to best measure the effectiveness of male human papillomavirus vaccine programmes?

In many countries now, vaccination of young adolescent girls with prophylactic human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines has been rolled out as a public health programme. In countries where coverage has been high, this has led to dramatic reductions in cervical high-grade precancerous lesions, as well as genital warts. A reduction in circulating vaccine-related HPV types has also been demonstrated. With the introduction of gender-neutral approaches incorporating universal vaccination of pre-adolescent boys in some countries, implementation of post-vaccine monitoring will be critical to evaluate the incremental impact of male vaccination. In contrast to cervical screening programmes, population-wide screening for HPV infection or related disease in males is not recommended; hence real-time monitoring of HPV vaccine effectiveness in males will require dedicated surveillance strategies. Monitoring the prevalence of circulating genital HPV types using a sentinel surveillance model could offer a good surrogate marker of early vaccine effectiveness in males. However, such an approach requires careful consideration of the most appropriate anatomical sites from which to collect specimens, the best sampling methods and the most sensitive assays to use. Additionally, in assessing an accurate measure of the impact of HPV vaccination in the male population, the effect of herd protection will need to be assessed, as most male programmes will commence in the setting of established female programmes. This poses an interesting epidemiological challenge.

Not the right time: why parents refuse to let their daughters have the human papillomavirus vaccination.

AIM: To explore why parents refused to allow their 10- to 12-year-old daughters to receive the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination from the Swedish school-based vaccination programme. METHODS: Individual interviews with 25 parents who had been offered, but not consented to, their daughters receiving the HPV vaccination. RESULTS: Five themes emerged through the interviews: 1) she is just a little girl, 2) inadequate information, 3) not compatible with our way of life, 4) scepticism about the vaccination and 5) who can you trust? The parents made their decisions with their child's best interests in mind. This was not considered the right time, and the vaccine was perceived as unnecessary and different from other vaccines. Mistrust in Government recommendations and a lack of evidence or information were other reasons to decline. CONCLUSION: The decision-making process was complex. These parents preferred to wait until their daughter was older and believed the information they received from the school health system was insufficient. The results indicate that a more flexible HPV vaccination schedule may improve vaccine uptake. This includes more transparent information about the virus and the vaccine and information about who to contact to get the daughter vaccinated at a later date.

Vaccine-preventable diseases: the role of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control.

The role of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) is to strengthen the capacity of the European Union (EU) Member States to protect human health through the prevention and control of infectious diseases. The main objective of the programme on vaccine-preventable diseases and invasive bacterial infections (VPD) is to provide robust evidence and high-quality technical support to the EU Member States to help them in their efforts to prevent and control VPD. Since the establishment of ECDC, several existing VPD surveillance networks have been transferred to ECDC, namely EU-IBIS, DIPNET and EUVAC. In addition to surveillance of diseases, ECDC is collecting information and monitoring other parameters that are of crucial importance for a well-functioning immunization system, including vaccination coverage. The VPD programme also provides independent scientific opinions in the area of immunization and initiates and coordinates scientific studies in the area of vaccination to answer specific questions of public health importance, including risk perception and analysis of behaviour in different population groups. One of the overall ECDC priorities over recent years is the Centre's involvement in measles elimination. The 'Message' tool and the 'Measles Atlas' are examples of work aiming at supporting the efforts of Member States in the elimination phase.

Actual immunization coverage throughout Europe: are existing data sufficient?

Assessing vaccine coverage is an essential component of vaccine programme monitoring and evaluation. Vaccine coverage data are available in EU/EEA countries at both national and subnational levels and are used for programmatic purposes at any level. European-wide data collection is performed by WHO through the Centralized Information System for Infectious Diseases, as part of the global data collection jointly conducted with UNICEF. Data quality and comparability are still challenging at an international level. According to available information, vaccination registries are available in 11 countries in the EU/EEA, but only in five countries do they have national coverage. In 2012 ECDC, through the VENICE II network, started the European Vaccination Coverage Collection System (EVACO project), with the final aim of improving the quality of vaccine coverage data at EU level, by defining and implementing standards.